|Jan-30-04|| ||AdrianP: Pretty brutal encounter, this one. |
|Jan-30-04|| ||PizzatheHut: What is the finish here? |
|Jan-30-04|| ||Honza Cervenka: 25...Kxc7 26.Qg3+ e5 27.Nf6 winning the Rook. |
|Jan-30-04|| ||AdrianP: <PizzatheHut>
The lines are complicated but I think these are the main ones
(1) 25... Kxc7 26. Qg3+
(a) ... e5 27. Nf6! wins the R in most lines, leaving W a piece ahead
(b) ... Kc8 27. Nd6+ Kxc7 28. Nxf5 Rxh4 29. Nxh4 leaves W a piece ahead
(c) ... other lines are similar(ish)
(2) 25... Kc8 26. Nd6+ Kxc7 27. Nxf5 Rxh4 28. Nxh4 leaves W a piece ahead
(3) 25... Kd7 26. Qg3 with unstoppable threats (27. Qd6+; Nf5+; if 26...e5 27. Nxc5+ picks up the Q)
(4) 25... Ke7 26. Qg3 followed by Nf6
|May-31-06|| ||RonB52734: This is the most recent game in the database in which Shabalov plays this gambit (Shirov-Shabalov, 7.g4) (today's opening of the day) from either side. And he gets beaten by it. If Shabalov has given up on this opening with the white pieces, it wouldn't seem to be because of this game.|
|Jun-01-06|| ||plang: Actually, Shabalov is defending against the gambit in this game. I guess he feels confortable playing either color in this line... or maybe he just prefers wild, dynamic positions at any cost no matter what color he plays.|
|Jun-01-06|| ||RonB52734: Yes, I should have said "This is the most recent game in the database in which Shabalov plays this opening" instead of "this gambit," although I did say "from either side." Nevertheless, I wonder if he has given up on it as part of his opening repertoire with the white pieces.|
|Mar-21-07|| ||Whitehat1963: What happens if 21. g6+?|
|Mar-26-08|| ||whiteshark: Today's opening of the day is again <Shirov-Shabalov, 7.g4> :D|
Why not <20...Qxg7> ?
|May-25-09|| ||Where is my mind: <Why not <20...Qxg7> ?> Yes that is much better. 20.Qf5? was a mistake even Qg6 is better.|
|Mar-26-10|| ||Matsumoto: Turning Shabby against Shabby! Gelfand has a brilliant sense of humour.|
|Jan-09-17|| ||ColeTrane: It seems like shabalov would play black better.....|
|Jun-30-19|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Did *not* understand this game, esp. the solution. Then read in the comments that Black should have won! If 20...Qg6 or 20...Qxg7 refutes the entire line, why does this qualify for a puzzle at all?|
|Jun-30-19|| ||mel gibson: I didn't know what to do.
Stockfish 10 agrees with the text:
(16. Qh3 (♕h7-h3 ♗f3xh1 ♗g5xf4 ♕d8xd4 ♕h3-g3
♖g8xg7 ♖a1-d1 ♖g7xg4 ♗f4-d6+ ♔e7-d8 ♕g3-h3 ♖g4-g1+ ♔e1-e2 ♕d4-g4+ ♕h3xg4
♖g1xg4 ♖d1xh1 ♘f6-e8 ♔e2-f3 ♖g4-b4 ♗d6-f4 ♔d8-e7 b2-b3 a7-a6 ♗b5-d3 ♖b4-d4
♗d3-e2 ♘e8-d6 h2-h4 f7-f6 ♗f4-e3 ♖d4-b4 h4-h5 ♘d6-f5 ♗e2-d3 ♖b4-h4 ♖h1xh4
♘f5xh4+ ♔f3-e2 b6-b5 ♘c3-e4 ♖a8-h8 ♘e4xc5 ♖h8xh5 ♘c5xa6 ♘h4-f5 ♗e3-c5+
♘f5-d6 ♗d3xb5 ♖h5xc5 ♘a6xc5 ♘d6xb5 a2-a4 ♘b5-c3+ ♔e2-d3 ♘c3-d1 a4-a5 ♔e7-d6
♔d3-c4 ♘d1xf2 a5-a6 f6-f5 a6-a7) +2.78/43 466)
score for White +2.78 depth 43
|Jun-30-19|| ||mel gibson: When Black resigns Stockfish 10 is saying:
(♔d8xc7 ♕h4-g3+ e6-e5 ♘e4-f6 ♕f5-e6 ♗d3xh7 ♕e6-c4+ ♗h7-c2 ♕c4-e2
♕g3-d3 ♕e2xd3 ♗c2xd3 ♔c7-d6 h2-h4 ♗h1-f3 h4-h5 ♗f3xh5 ♘f6xh5 ♔d6-e6 ♘h5-f6
b6-b5 ♗d3xb5 ♔e6-f5 ♘f6-d7 ♔f5xg5 ♘d7xe5 ♔g5-f4 ♘e5-d3+ ♔f4-f3 ♔c1-c2 f7-f6
♗b5-c6+ ♔f3-g4 ♘d3xc5 ♔g4-f5 ♗c6-b5 ♔f5-e5 b2-b4 ♔e5-d5 ♘c5-d3 ♔d5-d6 a2-a4
♔d6-d5 ♔c2-b2 ♔d5-d6 ♗b5-c4 ♔d6-c6 ♔b2-c1) -10.16/36 260
score for Black -10.16 depth 36
|Jun-30-19|| ||goodevans: <An Englishman [...] why does this qualify for a puzzle at all?>|
I guess it qualifies as a puzzle because <16.Qh3 Bxh1 17.Bxf4 Qxd4 18.Qg3> is somewhat better than the more obvious <16.Bxf6+ Kxf6 17.Ne4+ Bxe4 18.Qxe4> although the difference isn't enormous.
<If 20...Qg6 or 20...Qxg7 refutes the entire line, why does this qualify for a puzzle at all?>
After 18.Qg3 both players go a little astray. As per <mel gibson>'s first post, black would have been better off playing <18...Rxg7> and after <18...Ne4> white should have traded knights. So neither 20...Qg6 or 20...Qxg7 is a refutation because they aren't on the 'main line'.
That said, after 18.Qg3 there are so many possibilities to analyse that I think it only just qualifies as a puzzle at all (in the same way you wouldn't present the position after 1.d4 as a puzzle).
|Jun-30-19|| ||1stboard: What does " Stockfish " say if Black plays 16 Bxg4 instead of the text move ( Bxh1 ) - can someone run that please ? ( Thanks )|
|Jun-30-19|| ||agb2002: White is two pawns ahead.
Black threatens Bxh1, Bxg5 and Qxd4.
The prosaic 16.Bxf6+ Kxf6 17.Ne4+ Bxe4 (17... Ke7 18.Qh4+ and mate in two) 18.Qxe4 Qxd4 19.Qxd4+ cxd4 seems to lead to a drawish endgame.
The alternative is 16.Qh3, threatening Qxf3 and Bxf4, but after 16... Bxh1 17.Bxf4 Qxd4 I'm not sure whether White has compensation.
I don't know. I'd probably look at the clock and if the remaining time is an even number I'd play Bxf6+ and if it is odd then Qh3.
|Jun-30-19|| ||Shoogknight: <1stboard: What does " Stockfish " say if Black plays 16 Bxg4 instead of the text move ( Bxh1 ) - can someone run that please ? ( Thanks )>|
16...Bxg4?? 17.Bxf6+ Kxf6 18.Ne4+ Kxg7 19.Qxg4+ Kf8 20.Qxf4
|Jun-30-19|| ||dorsnikov: I wouldn't have thought of that winning line in a million years!|
|Jun-30-19|| ||Breunor: Mel Gibson, I'm not getting that result? Odd, we are using the same engine and probably about the same depth of analysis. I'm getting for the end:|
1) +7.12 (30 ply) 25...Kxc7 26.Qg3+ e5 27.Nf6 Qe6 28.Bxh7 Bc6 29.h4 Qc4+ 30.Bc2 Qe2 31.Qe3 Qxe3+ 32.fxe3 Kd6 33.h5 Ke7 34.h6 Kf8 35.Kd2 b5 36.Ng4 Bd5 37.Nxe5 Bxa2 38.Nd7+ Kg8 39.Nxc5 Bd5 40.Bd3 Bc4 41.Bxc4 bxc4 42.Kc3 Kh7 43.Nd7 Kg6 44.Ne5+ Kh7 45.Kd4 Kg8 46.Kxc4
Our lines are the same until the 28th move for black. So I reran the computer starting at Black's 28th:
It has Qc4 as second best:
2) +7.19 (23 ply) 28...Qc4+ 29.Bc2 Qe2 30.Qe3 Qxe3+ 31.fxe3 Kd6 32.h4 Bf3 33.h5 Bxh5 34.Nxh5 c4 35.b3 cxb3 36.Bxb3 Ke7 37.Bc4 Ke8 38.Nf6+ Kf8 39.Nd7+ Kg7 40.Kb2 Kg6 41.Nxe5+ Kxg5 42.Nxf7+ Kg4 43.Ne5+ Kf5 44.Nc6 a5 45.Ne7+ Kg5
I don't see how this can be anything but a win for white, white is a whole piece up and black can't get it back.
|Jun-30-19|| ||mel gibson: < Breunor: Mel Gibson, I'm not getting that result? Odd, we are using the same engine and probably about the same depth of analysis. I'm getting for the end:>|
That's the resignation point.
The depth on my computer is deeper.
It's depth 36 & I ran it for 260 seconds.
I have an i7 Quad core.
What were you using?
|Jun-30-19|| ||patzer2: Like yesterday's Saturday puzzle, today's Sunday puzzle (16. ?) involves a difficult position where small mistakes by both sides had an impact on the game's outcome.|
My attempted solution 16.Bxf6+ Kxf6 17.Ne4+ Bxe4 18.Qxe4 = (+0.20 @ 26 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 16...?) is only good for equality.
Strongest and best is the game continuation 16.Qh3! Bxh1 17.Bxf4 Qxd4 18.Qg3 ± (+1.39 @ 23 ply, Stockfish 9
analysis of move 16.?).
After 18. Qg3 ± Black has two reasonable replies, 18...Ne4 allowing 19. Nxe4 ± (+1.26 @ 20 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 18...?) and 18...Rxg7 allowing 19. Rd1 ± to +- (+1.79 @ 22 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 19.?).
Black's game was practically equal after White made a mistake with 19. Qh4+?, allowing 19...Qf6! = (+0.27 @ 26 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 19...?).
Instead of 19. Qh4+?, White, as <goodevans> observes, should have traded Knights with 19. Nxe4 (+1.26 @ 20 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 18...?).
After pulling it almost level with 19...Qf6 =, Black immediately went astray after 20. g5 with 20...Qf5? allowing 21. 0-0-0 +- (+3.98 @ 24 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 21.?).
Instead of 20...Qf5?, Black could have kept it nearly level with 20...Qxg7 ⩲ (+ 0.47 @ 22 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 20...?).
After losing this game Shabalov changed his opening line, discarding 7...dxc4 = (0.00 n@ 37 ply, Stockfish 9) in favor of 7...h6 = (0.00 @ 37 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 7...?) as in his win with it in Nakamura vs Shabalov, 2007.
|Jun-30-19|| ||PhilFeeley: Two "wild and crazy guys". What an amazing game.|
|Jul-01-19|| ||Breunor: Melgibson,
I also ran it for 6 minutes on a powerful machine. But the conclusion you have makes no sense. In the line you show look at the position after move 31. How can black not be completely lost in the line you show? Both sides have a king and 5 pawns but white is up a piece, N +B vs B.
And then on move 34 white is up 2 Pieces to none as black sacrifices the bishop to stop the h pawn!
Playing through the line you show, after move 42 white has a knight, bishop, and 3 pawns vs 2 pawns, neither advanced past the 6th rank.
In the line you show, it ends after whites 49th move. This is the position:
White has the king on c1, bishop on c5, knight on d3, pawns on a5, b5, and f2
Black has his king on c6 and pawns on h7 and f6.
So black is down 2 pieces and a pawn but you say the position is 10.16 for black? That's crazy.